Philosophy
- Thread starter tres
- Start date
Were they expecting to be arguing about God and got a lot of logic instead? I know a few people that made that error!
Personally I loved the course and would do it again in a flash.
EDIT: Just out of interest, Lysander (if you don't mind me asking) what are you doing job-wise now? I've dabbled in marketing but am really struggling to embark on a career. Philosophy isn't the most vocational thing I could have done!
I think a lot of people had fantasies about what they thought the course would be, yes. I personally found logic bloody difficult and failed it twice, after which they just let me move on anyway.
I loved Metaphysics and Modern Philosophy, but things like Ethic and Epistemology bored me to death.
Ironically I didn't take up Vedic Philosophy as an option, in spite of studying it and learning Sanskrit since age four.
No, philosophy is a totally non-vocational degree generally done by those who want to go to university but don't know what to do beyond that. Currently I negotiate housing contracts [good pay but dull] and also do work for a record label and gig promotion. All three were done with no reference to my degree.
I've always found it to be quite odd that its possible to be a student of philosophy when in reality it's something subjective to the point that it should be impossible to decide whether what somebody has said is right or wrong 
Very much like art degrees i suppose, I have always wondered how people find it acceptable to judge students art using traditional scientific judgemental techniques.
Somebody deserving of a degree in Chemistry say, will be able to demonstrate very obvious skills. The ones that then wish to shine will move on and gain academic recognition at a higher level.
Who is to say that an art students work is any the less worthy than anothers?
Purely for my own interest really, and apologies for derailing the thread OP, what do you hope to gain by doing a degree in Philosophy?
If its knowledge of past philosophers, is this not history? History of philosophy, something like that. If it is other peoples view on philosiphising, then you will find this by speaking to anybody clever enough to be able to handle a conversation beyond their last fight.
Sorry if that appears to be trolling, its a question I have wondered about for quite a while, what do regimented academic degrees covering philosophy actually offer the individuals who pay to do them?
Very much like art degrees i suppose, I have always wondered how people find it acceptable to judge students art using traditional scientific judgemental techniques.
Somebody deserving of a degree in Chemistry say, will be able to demonstrate very obvious skills. The ones that then wish to shine will move on and gain academic recognition at a higher level.
Who is to say that an art students work is any the less worthy than anothers?
Purely for my own interest really, and apologies for derailing the thread OP, what do you hope to gain by doing a degree in Philosophy?
If its knowledge of past philosophers, is this not history? History of philosophy, something like that. If it is other peoples view on philosiphising, then you will find this by speaking to anybody clever enough to be able to handle a conversation beyond their last fight.
Sorry if that appears to be trolling, its a question I have wondered about for quite a while, what do regimented academic degrees covering philosophy actually offer the individuals who pay to do them?
See I loved Epistemology, sort of ended up specialising (as far as possible) in that area, and got quite interested in Phenomenology. Really enjoyed Philosophy of Language as well.
Couldn't stand Ethics though, it was disgustingly boring!
manic man said:
I can see your point, and it may, arguably, come more into its own at PhD level. However, a BA and MA in Philosophy is much more about learning to think, and learning to structure arguments. It "teaches" you fantastic writing skills. I know that this sounds arrogant, but you can often spot the difference between arguing with somebody who has done philosophy and arguing with somebody who has not.
Again, I can see your point, and it may become valid at a higher level, when some people may like your work, and some may not. However, as I have said, the students who shine during a philosophy degree are those who show that they can think, and that they can apply fairly rigorous logic. You could have the greatest idea in the world, but if you put it in a philosophy paper without arguing for it, it would (rightly, in my opinion) be shot down.
Firstly, it's something that I find to be truly fascinating; I doubt that many students, whether they do Chemistry or whether they do Fine Art, would do their degree unless it interested them.
In terms of what I hope to gain, like I say, it is an exercise in learning to think; much like an English degree may be an exercise in learning to write correctly, done through the medium of past authors or poets, so philosophy is in terms of thought.
I know that it sounds silly, but I genuinely believe that I gained as much, if not more, out of my degree as I could out of any other; not necessarily in terms of saying that I am now qualified to do such-and-such, but in terms of gaining skills that could be applied to absolutely anything. It's a little harder to quantify what you gain through a Philsophy degree as it is through a Chemistry degree, but I do not believe that I have received worse "value for money" in the slightest.
No problem - these are questions that I ask myself every time that I re-write my CV! I hope I've answered your questions
Last edited:
I've always found it to be quite odd that its possible to be a student of philosophy when in reality it's something subjective to the point that it should be impossible to decide whether what somebody has said is right or wrong
It's not about finding out if something is right or wrong, but the study of opinions/thought processes made by minds far superior to yours and mine.
As I said, I don't think anyone hopes to gain anything by a degree in Philosophy. In my experience it's a degree done by those who want to go to university but don't know what to do beyond that. I had a genuine interest in Philosophy since the school I went to was heavily involved in it, but if anything it actually killed my enjoyment of the subject.
Yep. BA with a major in religious studies and a minor in philosphy.
Fair enough, both posts answered what I thought to be the case for most.
I understand that the psychological aspect can be (and is) fascinating, as is dissecting and analysing the ideas of past and present masters, but as far as being a degree... Surely its a collection of other disciplines.
Then again, the argument I just made holds for most MAs and arts degrees. I guess my overriding opinion is that degrees of the arts arn't degrees at all. However I am biased as I sit in the sciences
I love the work that art degrees bring out but dislike watching the process of "marking" said work. For some areas such as engineering design, there is definately a very academic aspect that needs too over ride pure creativity, thus perhaps these fit into a nich'e within engineering, but for most, who is to say ones mans Picasso isn't another mans Da Vinci (if you see what I mean).
If, for example, "BA in Philosophy" were replaced with the title "BA in theoretical human psychology and creative thinking" would this be any less accurate a title for the degree?
EDIT: Actually re-reading that post, I have answered my own question. I think my argument is that Philosophy isn't a degree, its a concept. Within the concept are more traditional degree worthy subject areas. So I am saying that naming the degree Philosophy is erroneous, but there is scope for a degree that covers the areas in perhaps less detail than a specific degree would. But having said that, this means I am simply nit-picking over the name "Philosophy" rather than some long winded (but perhaps more suitable) title for the same degree. So all in all... ignore me! Though, perhaps this also means Philosophy should be considered within the sciences and not the arts?
I understand that the psychological aspect can be (and is) fascinating, as is dissecting and analysing the ideas of past and present masters, but as far as being a degree... Surely its a collection of other disciplines.
Then again, the argument I just made holds for most MAs and arts degrees. I guess my overriding opinion is that degrees of the arts arn't degrees at all. However I am biased as I sit in the sciences
I love the work that art degrees bring out but dislike watching the process of "marking" said work. For some areas such as engineering design, there is definately a very academic aspect that needs too over ride pure creativity, thus perhaps these fit into a nich'e within engineering, but for most, who is to say ones mans Picasso isn't another mans Da Vinci (if you see what I mean).
If, for example, "BA in Philosophy" were replaced with the title "BA in theoretical human psychology and creative thinking" would this be any less accurate a title for the degree?
EDIT: Actually re-reading that post, I have answered my own question. I think my argument is that Philosophy isn't a degree, its a concept. Within the concept are more traditional degree worthy subject areas. So I am saying that naming the degree Philosophy is erroneous, but there is scope for a degree that covers the areas in perhaps less detail than a specific degree would. But having said that, this means I am simply nit-picking over the name "Philosophy" rather than some long winded (but perhaps more suitable) title for the same degree. So all in all... ignore me! Though, perhaps this also means Philosophy should be considered within the sciences and not the arts?
Last edited:
Awesome replies, thanks guys.
I'm seriously considering doing a University of London external course.. like OU...
There's the three year BA, or a 1 year diploma. I read quite a bit of philosophy, things like metaphysics and epistemology.. and it actually excites me, the thought of it all.
I'll chuck you some emails later, reply if you have the time, would love some insight into topics covered, suggestions etc
I have quite a bit of spare time (I live on a tiny island)... speedboats only take up so much time, and would love to better myself further by doing a OU or equivalent course.
After trawling through topics and subjects, philosophy is the only one I keep considering. Turns out, subconciously, most of the fiction books I've read involve metaphysics, epistemology etc.
And the ability to argue better, even to understand others who argue... surely that'll benefit the business career i'm currently in!
At the end of the day, it's a personal decision, rather than a career one.
Does anything really exist?
Do things exist or does our perception of them bring them into existence?
When a tree falls in the woods, does it makes a sound etc.
For me this has always had a reasonably obvious non-answer (by non-answer I mean an answer that effectively states the implied reality is an impossibility).
Practically speaking, of course something exists without being perceived, if it did not then the intricate balance of variables that make up the known and unknown universe would not exist, our limited perception cannot possibly experience it all, heck we havent even physically gotten ourselves past the moon yet! In this case, the tree must have made a sound, even though nobody experienced it.
Metaphorically speaking (say it like the guy from the Mask), things we have not perceived, do not exist for us, therefore something we have not experienced does not yet exist in our own world. In this case the tree did not make a sound as although its movement disrupted the air, thus creating soundwaves, nobody experienced the waves, therefore a consciousness never brought them into being.
Neither answer is correct, therefore there actually is no correct answer to the question of existence.
To the OP, if you are doing it for personal gain, can afford to do so and have in ingrained interest in what they term Philosophy, I cannot think of any better reasons to do a University degree
Not entirely sure what you mean by that?
I used to have a friend who referred to people he thought were being idiots as "chief".
If that was the case, then maybe philosophy isn't for you
As it really is often interpreting the rambling diatribe of others. I spend many hours with my peers discussing this kind of thing, as it's what academics tend to end up doing in order to sound intellegent to each other (read into that what you will). I enjoy a good philosophical debate but would never pretend to be an expert in the history of it or psychology behind it.If you meant it positively, then my apologies, it's just I have never heard anybody else use chief in another light.